PAPER ADMISSION AND SELECTION SYSTEM

The process of accepting and selecting papers plays an important role in the procedure of article publication. This allows writers to perfect their manuscripts and assist editors in making decisions on submitted manuscripts. The peer review process is used in the double-blind peer review process.

Double-blind peer review operates as an anonymous evaluation where the identity of the scriptwriter remains confidential to the assigned reviewer. Any information that may reveal the identity of the author will be redacted from the manuscript prior to review. Likewise, the identity of the reviewer is still hidden from the writer when submitting his input.

The process uses a three-stage review process:

1. Editorial Team,

2. Paper Selection Process (Peer-Review),

3. Editor's Decision.

1. Editorial Team
   
   

When submitted, the manuscript is reviewed to ensure it meets the minimum requirements of the conference proceedings. At this stage, the manuscript is reviewed as follows: Possible plagiarism: the manuscript is evaluated to assess its similarity to a previously published work. Proceedings use Turnitin's plagiarism detection system for this purpose. Manuscripts that show a substantial similarity of 25% to other works, including previous publications of the author, are sent back to the author and authors are required to resubmit the manuscript that corresponds to the minimum plagiarism check score. The author is given a similarity report along with a decision on the re-submission requirements. 

Scope: Once the manuscript passes the similarity check, the content of the manuscript is reviewed to ensure alignment with the scope of the selected conference process. In cases where the content of the manuscript does not correspond to the scope of the trial, the author's consent to the possibility of transferring the manuscript to the journal provided is more appropriate. However, it is important to note that transferring a manuscript does not guarantee its automatic admission in a new journal; It will still undergo a standard peer review process and can be accepted or rejected based on suitability

References:

The proceedings encourage authors to cite 30 or more references, with preference for most of the sources cited being publications from the last ten years.

Language:

All manuscripts submitted must be written in English. Providing an English proofreading certificate from a credible proofreading service is preferred.

Structure:

The manuscript is checked for its writing structure and organization to ensure it meets the guidelines and templates provided.

Manuscripts that fail in the first stage of the review process are returned to the author to be modified and resubmitted. This first stage of manuscript review is usually completed within one week

2. Peer-review process

After the manuscript successfully passes the initial review conducted by the editorial team, the manuscript will proceed to the second stage of evaluation. The second stage of the review process uses a double-blind system. A reviewer is selected from our database, the journal's editorial board, or other trusted sources, to ensure that they have expert knowledge in the subject area of the manuscript. If they agree to review the manuscript, the full text will be shared with them, and the identity of the author will be kept confidential. 

Reviewers are in charge of evaluating manuscripts and providing constructive feedback to assist authors in improving their quality. They also score manuscripts based on criteria such as originality, contribution to the field, technical rigor, clarity of presentation, and depth of research. In the end, the reviewer made one of the following recommendations regarding the manuscript:

A. Acceptance

B. Revision with specific recommendation

C. Major revision and re-evaluation

D. Rejection. In this case, the reviewer provides specific reasons why the manuscript cannot be further processed

After receiving comments from reviewers, the editorial team conducts a thorough review of the input. Furthermore, all reviewer's comments are shared with the author, while the reviewer's identity remains confidential. The duration required to complete the second stage of manuscript review depends on the availability of reviewers but is expected to be completed between one and four weeks.

Using the insights provided in the reviewer's comments, the author makes the necessary revisions to the manuscript and then submits the revised version. After receiving the submission of this revision, the manuscript continues to the third and final stage of the review process.

3. Editor's Decision

In this phase, all editors review the manuscript together and make one of the followingdecisions:

A. Accepted, without revision

B. Accepted, with minor revision

C. Accepted, with major revision

Manuscripts that are accepted without the need for revision are scheduled for publication. For manuscripts that require corrections, whether small or large, the author is given suggestions for changes from the editor and asked to make the necessary revisions. After these corrections are implemented, the editor conducts a second review of the manuscript before it is completed for publication. All final articles are sent to the editors of the Conference Proceedings or Journal and are scheduled for publication.

Using the insights provided in the reviewer's comments, the author makes the necessary revisions to the manuscript and then submits the revised version. After receiving the submission of this revision, the manuscript continues to the third and final stage of the review process.

Guest Editors:

1. Prof. Dr. Edi Syafri (Scopus ID: 57196348984)

Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh, Indonesia

2. Nanang Masruchin, Ph.D. (Scopus ID: 56586227800)

National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Indonesia

3. Dr. Muhammad Adly Rahandi Lubis (Scopus ID: 57192278476)

National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Indonesia

Reviewers:

1. Asri Peni Wulandari, M.Sc., Ph.D. (Scopus ID: 6503951376)
   Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia

2. Prof. Dr. Widya Fatriasari, M.Hut. (Scopus ID: 56690604600)

National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Indonesia

3. Dr. Ir. Mujiyono, M.T. (Scopus ID: 57201057199)
   Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia

4. Dr. Ahmad Ilyas Rushdan (Scopus ID: 57196328367)

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia

5. Yolani Syaputri, Ph.D. (Scopus ID: 57205441626)

Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia

6. Prof. Dr. Nia Rossiana, M.Si. (Scopus ID: 57190934596)
   Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia

7. Febri Doni, Ph.D. (Scopus ID: 56183641700)
   Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia

8. Dr. Yasmi Purnamasari Kuntana, M.Si. (Scopus ID: 57891231300)

Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia